BAROMETER 2021
THE PERCEPTION OF RISKS AND SECURITY
IN FRANCE
http://barometre.irsn.fr

For more than 30 years, the IRSN Barometerhas been following annually the perception ofrisks and security by the French people. This
continuous study provides precious insight tobetter understand risk perception, which in turnhelps IRSN better handle risk assessment.
The Barometer focuses on four major topics:
1) the current concerns of the French,
2) their views on science and expertise,3) their perception of various risk situations,4) their opinion on nuclear matters.
This year, for the 5th consecutive year, it also
displays some viewpoints from external
experts.

Methodological note: up to this year, the survey had been
carried out by face-to-face interviews. In November 2020,
it was conducted over the internet for the first time. A faceto-face survey was carried out simultaneously to monitor
the effects of this change in methodology. The effects aremostly negligible, except for specific questions which havebeen singled out. See all results: http://barometre.irsn.fr.

In 2020, in the context of the covid-19
pandemic, the main concern of the French is“health" (26 %), newly introduced this year. It isahead of “terrorism” (19 %) and “the climate crisis”(15 %). "Extreme poverty and exclusion", which was
top of the list last year, dropped from 20 % to 13 %.

Part 1 – Question 2: “Among the following environmental issues, which one do you find most concerning?”
Evolution from 2000 to 2020

Regarding the main environmental concern, “the climatecrisis” remains the top priority. With 39 % of responses, itwidens the gap with the next two issues, identical to lastyear’s: "the disappearance of animal species" (14 %) and"damages due to natural disasters" (13 %).
As regards the perception of the catastrophic potential ofindustrial activities, nuclear power plants remain in 2020
the installations that the French believe most likely tocause a serious accident in France (33 %), ahead ofradioactive waste disposals (21 %) and chemical facilities(19 %). In the context of the covid-19 pandemic, "virus
research laboratories" see their score rise from 7 % to13 %. Questioned about the catastrophic events theyview as most frightening, the Chernobyl and Fukushima
accidents remain on top, with respectively 46 % and 23 %of the responses, ahead of the 2004 Indian Oceantsunami (13 %) and the explosion of the AZF chemicalplant in Toulouse, France, in 2001 (8 %).
The image of science and experts remains largely
positive, even if it has been dented by the pandemic. In2020, 61 % of French people declare trusting scientificinstitutions and 50 % have a good or very good opinion ofscientific experts, while 11 % have a bad or very badopinion. The perception of science and technology
confirms its historically high level reached last year. In
2020, the proposition "the development of science andtechnology generates more benefits than negativeeffects" is supported by 53 %. As for the top quality
expected from experts, "competence" stays first (34 %),ahead of "honesty" (26 %) and “independence” (20 %).

The image of science and experts remains largely

Part 2 – Question 1: “The development of science and technology generates more benefits than negative effects”

The French show a strong attachment to having decisionmakers rely on experts. Eighty-two per cent of them thinkthat the creation of the “covid-19 scientific council” by theGovernment is a good thing and 57 % think that decisionmakers do not take enough account of the opinion ofscientific experts.
Broad access to quality information still matters a great
deal: expert bodies making their reports public is deemed“a priority” for 71 %. And 69 % believe that the same bodies
should commit to answering all citizens' questions.
This desire for transparency is complemented by a demandfor quality information: 79 % of the French consider that
“we must be certain of the opinions of scientific experts
before informing the public”. This score is well above thehistorical average (71 %). In a year marked by scientificcontroversies, the French attach great importance to thereliability of information.
This year, the Barometer continues to follow around 30 risk
situations. For each of them, the French were questionedon two dimensions: the perceived level of risk and the trustin the authorities to handle the situation.
In terms of perceived level of risk, the top two situations
remain as last year “terrorism” (76 % judge the risk “high”)
and “cancer” (73 %). Pandemics enter the Barometer in third
place with 71 %. Pesticides, third last year, follow with a stillhigh score (67 %). We observe a sustained growth in theperceived risk associated with “endocrine disruptors”: thetotal “high” risk level rose from 33 % in 2014 to 52 % in 2020.
The opposite is true for “AIDS”, which has fallen from 69 %in 1997 to a historic low of 29 % this year following a steadydecline. Regarding nuclear and radiological risks, “Nuclearpower plants” (41 %) and “radioactive waste” (48 %) stay inthe middle. This year, both have high "low" and "close tozero" responses: historic peak for waste (23 %) and second
historic value for NPPs (26 %). “Medical X-rays” (20 %,“high” responses), “radon” (20 %) and “radiation therapy
accidents” (21 %) have, as is customary, the lowest level ofperceived risk.
The trust level the French have in the authorities to protect
them from risk situations decreases overall. The change inmethodology (web survey) influenced the responses to thisquestion, as we confirmed with our control survey. The risk
for which that the French have the most confidence in theauthorities is AIDS (41 %). Conversely, and for the first time,endocrine disruptors have the lowest level of confidence(16 %), before pesticides (17 %) and nanoparticles (17 %).
The level of confidence falls again for noise pollution(21 %), which has moved from 8th to 23rd position in twoyears. The relative confidence in nuclear power plants andradioactive waste has increased. The first gains sevenplaces to reach 10th position among 31 this year. The
second has moved from 33rd to 21st in two years. The mosthighly educated tend to trust the authorities more easily,
and, for nuclear risks this is particularly true for those witha scientific background.
This year, the Barometer looks at the French people's
opinion of nuclear energy by asking questions fromprevious editions which had not being asked for years.

Part 3 – Question 1: “For AIDS, do you consider that the risks for the French in general are …?”

They appear quite divided. A majority of them have aretrospective positive view of the nuclear power: 53 %say that "the construction of the plants was a good thing",
18 % disagree. But they are rather opposed to theconstruction of NPPs (45 % v. 30 % in favour). They are
split on the question of their shutdown: 38 % are in favor
but 30% are opposed and 32 % neither for nor against.
The two main arguments in favour of nuclear power
remain energy independence (33 %) and “the low cost ofelectricity” (24 %). In contrast, the main argument against
this year is "the production of nuclear waste" (36 %) for
the first time since 2009, ahead of "the risk of accident"(27 %) which is usually first.
Ten years after the Fukushima accident, the Barometer
looks back at how the French consider the Fukushima
and Chernobyl accidents. Twenty-nine per cent of them
now say that "After the accident, the authorities gave thepublic complete and correct information", compared with
20 % in 2011 and 2015. The perception of the authorities'
role has therefore improved. At the same time, 52 % thinkthat "The truth about the consequences of the Fukushima
accident is being hidden", a score that is stable comparedto 2011. The equivalent figure is 73 % for the Chernobylaccident.
A focus on nuclear waste confirms that the French know

little about how it is being managed. Twenty-seven percent
think that very low-level radioactive waste is sent to othercountries and 10 % that it is dumped at sea. Furthermore,
39 % believe that it is not "possible to store nuclear waste
safely today”.
In 2020, 62 % of French people think that a Fukushimatype accident could happen in France, but 52 % think it isunlikely. Moreover, 57 % believe that "all precautions aretaken to ensure a very high level of safety in French nuclearplants", while 17 % disagree.
The demand for a high level of nuclear safety is confirmed
by 86 % of French people who say that "operators of
nuclear sites must protect their facilities from all risks,even those deemed highly unlikely" and 77 % consider it isa priority to "strengthen inspections of facilities by thecompetent authorities".
Finally, concerning the competence and credibility of
nuclear actors, the CNRS (French public researchorganization), ASN (French nuclear safety authority) andIRSN are once again perceived as both the mostcompetent and the most credible. Scientific bodies,experts and operators are perceived as competent andcredible. The actors perceived as less credible and lesscompetent remain the trade unions, journalists andpolitical actors.

Part 4 – Question 9: "Here are a number of sentences regarding nuclear energy. Please indicate whether you agree
or disagree: The construction of nuclear power plants was a good thing”.

Question 10: "What do you think is currently being done with the very low-level radioactive waste produced inFrance?"For more details, contact the authors of the study: Ludivine Gilli (ludivine.gilli@irsn.fr) and Rémi Velez (remi.velez@irsn.fr).